Putin Stymies Globalists

In the wake of the late-April meeting of the Trilateral Commission (TC)—and with the 2014Bilderberg meeting dead ahead in Denmark—globalists are fuming over Russia’smoves in the Crimea and its nationalist economic and energy initiatives.

Russia’s strong nationalist stance and its push fora “multi-polar” world system—rather than one dominatedby the United States—suggest that RussianPresident Vladimir Putin is seeking a more decentralizedworld order. That may be embodied inPutin’s moves to negotiate trade and energy deals directly withAsian-Pacific nations, including Japan andSouth Korea, leaving the internationalists out in thecold. It is also reflected in Putin’s overtures to China.

Although it’s too early to forecast outcomes, aRussia that asserts itself independently on the worldstage, with minimal linkages to Western powerstructures, means a world that could avoid having a singular source of ultimate authority.

This is why Secretary of State John Kerry told theAtlantic Council at a gathering in late April that Putinmust be opposed simply because he is challenging “the international system.”

Western global expansionists lament that Putinrefused to join the World Trade Organization. Andvarious Western think tank policy papers show thatPutin may be intent on forming a formal confederation,comprised of Russia and former Soviet statesthat are now in the loosely knit Commonwealth ofIndependent States. A confederation is a less centralizedarrangement, comparable to Switzerland.The European Union is a federation, with a singular authority located in Brussels.

In contrast, Western corporate and banking interestssupport world government, an ultimate“unipolar” world with one super-concentrated centralauthority—a difficult goal that requires patientgradualism forged by the TC, theBilderberg group and related secretive and semi-secretive Zionist-controlled outfits.

This is what is behind the Trilateralists’ supportfor a “Europe 2020” rubric consisting of a “fiscal union” among the 28 EU member nations.That means member states would have tocompletely surrender their autonomy to collecttaxes and use the receipts for national public expenditures.Under a fiscal union such matters wouldbe centralized, giving the EU direct control over taxationand spending power in direct contrast to statesovereignty where countries define their own fiscalpolicies.

The above fiscal item appears to harmonize withremarks this AMERICAN FREE PRESS writer chronicled at an April 2013Brookings Institution meeting at which a FederalReserve-style central bank for Europe was an announced goal.

Mark Anderson is roving editor for AMERICAN FREE PRESS. He will be in Denmark this year to cover the Bilderberg Meeting. Call 202-544-5977, Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, to see how you can help.